AMENDMENT IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The way most people read this amendment is that as long as the searches and seizures are not "unreasonable," that it is ok for your government to proceed with such action.
Who defines "unreasonable?" The Supreme Court? The majority of citizens through their representatives?
The proper way to read the 4th amendment, from a presumption of liberty, is that the first part of the amendment is a "preamble" or the stated reason for the 4th amendment.
The "guts" of the 4th amendment states if there is a "probable" cause, supported an oath by the person stating that there is probable cause, that a citizen is about to harm other citizens, then a judge will issue a warrant describing exactly what is being looked for and what will be confiscated that is being used to probably harm other citizens.
Assuming that all airline passengers are potential terrorists without an affirmed probable cause and then searching them without a warrant describing what is being looked for, by the TSA, a government agency, is blatantly unconstiutional and violates the intent and stated design of the amendment. Any action to the contrary means that we are not really free.
If the airlines wish to hire their own security personnel to conduct such searches, they can do that without violating the constitution. It is their private property and they can defend and protect it as their hearts desire.
That is how "free" people handle this issue of airline security.
Free people use the tenants and covenants of liberty, private property ownership, and the free market powers of capitalism to solve this problem.
Communists and socialists ask their government to destroy the covenants of liberty, private property ownership, and capitalism for such a dubious goal.
Great summation BUMP.
"Assuming that all airline passengers are potential terrorists without an affirmed probable cause and then searching them without a warrant describing what is being looked for, by the TSA, a government agency, is blatantly unconstitutional and violates the intent and stated design of the amendment."
Sez you. Take it to court and win, otherwise, submit to a search or take a hike.
"Any action to the contrary means that we are not really free."
Yeah, right. The terrorists have already won. Blah, blah, blah.
We are free to decide what is a reasonable search. The majority of the people believe that in light of the history of airline hijackings it is reasonable to search people for weapons and bombs before letting them on planes.
We also require people to go through metal detectors and have their effects searched when going into Federal Buildings and courtrooms.
It was the people's representatives who decided to create the TSA. The courts can decide that being searched before getting on airplanes are a violation of the constitution, but have not done so.
Only cranks believe that searches before getting on an airplane marks the line of demarcation between free and unfree people.
“Who defines "unreasonable?" The Supreme Court? The majority of citizens through their representatives?”
Ultimately, the Supreme Court. Thank heavens we are not using your standard for searches, needing a warrant before being able to search a person getting on an airplane, or we would have had many more deaths and probably would not have any commercial aviation.